Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Special Improvement Districts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee advances amendment to soccer-stadium SID to add front office, parking parcel and park area

St. Louis City Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee · March 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee voted 6-0 to advance Board Bill 168, which amends the soccer-stadium special improvement district (SID) to include the team's front office, a previously excluded parking parcel and part of Alo Park West; a public commenter raised transparency concerns about related taxing districts.

The St. Louis City Housing, Urban Development and Zoning Committee voted unanimously to advance Board Bill 168 with a 'due pass' recommendation, sending the measure to the full Board for further consideration.

The bill would amend an existing special improvement district (SID) established around the city's new soccer stadium to correct gaps in the district's boundaries. Alderman Aldridge introduced the measure and called on team staff to explain the changes. Courtney Miller, director of public engagement for St. Louis City SC, said the SID was designed so the privately owned district could help recover infrastructure investments tied to the stadium and surrounding development. "The district has invested about $667 million into the stadium," Miller said, and the team has contributed "about $15 million so far" in surrounding investments, including training facilities, sidewalks and lighting upgrades.

Supporters said the amendment would add the team's front office, incorporate a parking parcel that had been excluded earlier, and extend the SID to include part of Alo Park West under a cooperative agreement with the parks department. Miller said the cooperative arrangement would allow the district to fund event-related services such as additional security and trash pickup while not diverting revenue from the park itself: "There's no revenue that is taken from the park for that," she said.

During public comment, Mr. Connelly, who identified himself as taking a neutral, informational position on the boundary adjustments, urged the committee to consider the broader web of incentives tied to the stadium. He said the Port Authority had approved an amended petition that could create a port improvement district expected to levy an additional 1% on food and beverage sales inside the stadium boundaries and raised concerns about notice and transparency for those processes. "So your beer and food at the stadium are going to get even more expensive," Connelly said, and he recommended stronger city representation in related governing bodies to reduce private control of taxing districts.

Committee members asked the presenters to share the prior SID map with the clerk and probed the Port Authority's role. Committee discussion included an explanation that Port Authority involvement arose partly because contractors discovered an underground spring during construction that required significant pumping and treatment; the Port Authority was participating in that infrastructure work. Members also clarified that Alo Park West is city property and that SID-funded work would augment, not replace, the parks department's baseline maintenance.

A member asked how the SID is funded; presenters confirmed it draws from sales and use tax revenue generated inside the district on event activity rather than property taxes. The stadium's sustainability work drew praise from members: Miller said the team achieved a zero-waste goal, with "90% of all waste diverted during all of our match days." Several members said they were generally wary of single-site SIDs but nonetheless supported advancing this boundary amendment.

Alderman Aldridge closed by thanking the team for its investments and partnership with the city and asked for a due-pass recommendation. The motion passed on a roll call vote reported by the clerk as six affirmative votes and no negative votes. The bill will proceed to the full Board.

The committee had no additional items and adjourned.